AT&T told Angwin that the header program "has been phased off our network." Security researcher Kenn White, who operates a site to check whether a carrier inserts the header, partially confirmed the report. White said "it's not zero, but as a relative proportion, down over 90% and falling." At least one person found that AT&T is still sending the header, so it's important that AT&T do a full review of their network to ensure the phase-out is truly complete. Angwin also reports that Verizon is continuing its tracking program. EFF's own tests so far confirm the tracking header is now absent from accounts that were previously subject to header injection.

Decline in observed AT&T headers. Chart by Kenn White.

Decline in observed AT&T headers. Chart by Kenn White.

This move by AT&T leaves Verizon out in the cold as the only remaining US provider to insert these tracking headers, and shows that concerned customers can produce meaningful change in their carriers' policies. It is also a victory for carrier non-interference with customer data. We call on Verizon to follow AT&T's lead and terminate their tracking header injection program or convert it to a true opt-in, immediately.

Related Updates

A fight over unmasking an anonymous Reddit commenter has turned into a significant win for online speech and fair use. A federal court has affirmed the right to share copyrighted material for criticism and commentary, and shot down arguments that Internet users from outside the United States can’t...

Coin Center’s Peter Van Valkenburgh published a report exploring the potential Constitutional concerns should aggressive regulators attempt to crack down on the coders developing ideas for cryptocurrencies and decentralized exchanges. For long-time readers of the EFF blog, some of these ideas will seem familiar. EFF has been asserting that publishing...

A bill introduced in Texas threatens the free speech rights of 28 million residents by making it easier to bring frivolous lawsuits against speakers and to harass or intimidate them into silence. EFF has long been concerned about these types of lawsuits, called Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, or SLAPPs...

The Texas Supreme Court upheld protections for anonymous online speakers in a January ruling, albeit in a way that sidestepped thorny legal questions but will likely have the effect of vindicating First Amendment rights going forward. The case, Glassdoor, Inc. v. Andra Group, concerned an effort by clothing...

A lawsuit filed in New York federal court last week against the creator of the “Shitty Media Men” list and its anonymous contributors exemplifies how individuals often misuse the court system to unmask anonymous speakers and chill their speech. That’s why we’re watching this case closely, and we’re prepared...

Facebook has a problem: an infestation of undercover cops. Despite the social platform’s explicit rules that the use of fake profiles by anyone—police included—is a violation of terms of service, the issue proliferates. While the scope is difficult to measure, EFF has identified scores of agencies who maintain policies that...

The leak investigation involving a Senate staffer and a New York Times reporter raises significant issues about journalists, digital security, and the ability of journalists to protect confidential sources. The New York Times recently revealed that the FBI had been investigating a former aide to the Senate Intelligence Committee...

People in marginalized communities who are targets of persecution and violence—from the Rohingya in Burma to Native Americans in North Dakota—are using social media to tell their stories, but finding that their voices are being silenced online. This is the tragic and unjust consequence of content moderation policies...

Update (February 15, 2018): The California Supreme Court denied Yelp's request to depublish the lower court's opinion.
In recent months, we’ve seen worrying decisions in state and federal courts that weaken the First Amendment protection for anonymous speech. Last week, EFF called on the California Supreme Court...

Requiring public universities to ban access to anonymous online speech platforms would undermine activism occurring on those campuses and violate the First Amendment, EFF argued in a brief filed on Thursday.
Plaintiffs in the case, Feminist Majority Foundation et al. v. University of Mary Washington, claim that university officials...